Comments on: Just say Ahhhhhh

By: » SOCAN Goes After Hairdressers

» SOCAN Goes After Hairdressers — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:06:15 +0000

[...] Publishers of Canada (SOCAN) is trying to extort money from hairdressers: SOCAN, “wanted to gouge health practicioners while their patients relaxed to the sound of music,” p2pnet posted in 2004. Then they turned to [...]

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Wed, 28 Jul 2004 09:14:25 +0000

This is a new level of idiocy, both on the part of SOCAN as well as on the part of the poor idiotic Canuckistanian Dentists.

It’s a serious problem in Canada: A respect for “authority”… people will pretty much do anything they are told to, no matter how idiotic it sounds, and how little real authority they really hold.

Someone needs to smack around pretty much the whole country, and make them wake up.

But then, crushing taxes couldn’t inspire a revolution in over 200 years, so what the hell else would?

I have no idea.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jul 2004 05:49:38 +0000

hahaha

and you know when one of the poor starving Music Stars goes to a cosmetic quack for a face life (or other ; – ) …………

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jul 2004 05:14:06 +0000

Yeah, if they are in pain, just reject them. hehe

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jul 2004 03:54:54 +0000

The music industry just does not get it. They expect the public to hand over money and not to be able to lissen to what they have paid for. The next step will be for them to put out a CD of silence , but wait then who would they say owned silence. They could charge everyone in the world who does not lissen to music because they are lessoning to silence which they would now own. Far fitched , just wait that will be the next grab at your wallet.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jul 2004 01:31:48 +0000

Yep.

And consider this:

All health organizations, especially the Canadian Dental Association whose members have all those nasty sharp picks and high-speed drills and so on, should demand to know if patients belong to SOCAN.

I leave the rest to your imaginations —— heh

Cheers!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jul 2004 00:32:31 +0000

These guys must be kidding. If they want to argue that muzak playing in a dentist’s office is a public performance, deserving of royalty payments, they should be able to prove that people are going to the dentist’s office just to listen to the music! They can’t get the double whammy of expecting the dentists to pay for the CDs and then pay again for the right to play them in a waiting area. The fact that they were willing to accept a “minimum yearly fee” clearly shows that it’s merely a “money grab”. If the music is “not their property” they what exactly did they pay for? If it was a personal license to the music but not one permitting use for waiting areas it should be stated clearly on the packaging. In fact, if they are so adamant about upholding these rules, they should have to mount a campaign to educate the public that they do not actually own the music they have purchared. Furthermore, it should be paid for by SOCAN from its own pockets, newly lined with the dentists’ money.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 27 Jul 2004 00:12:48 +0000

Zounds! A Sounds Thief!!! I’m going to turn you over to the RIAA (evil laughter ….)

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 26 Jul 2004 23:51:37 +0000

“[...]the music is not their property,” the report has SOCAN licensing manager Bruce Wilde stating.

Not our property? Then all this time, we’ve been trading $15-$20 for a piece of plastic and a license to play it?

“And if it’s being used in a public fashion or any kind of commercial fashion, then [musicians] deserve to be compensated for its use.”

Oops. Just before summer vacation started, the leader of our small church group (aside from the rest of the church) wanted to check out what kind of music is going on with us young adults and teens nowadays. So people just brought in some personal CDs and we played them on a stereo. This is definitely public performance, so should all of us have paid royalties to hear the material? We didn’t, which is ironic. Do we also have to force royalties from relatives who hear it too?

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 26 Jul 2004 23:20:59 +0000

“SOCAN recently fired a Cease and Desist letter at p2pnet for having the gall to show the organization’s logo in a story”

Would it be legal to just link to the image on the Socan site directly, instead of copying the graphic onto the p2pnet servers?

We all know that “link leeching” is not considered good netiquette, (but then neither is sending C&Ds) but it should be legal since no actual copying takes place.

Maybe someone needs to create a listing for Socan-safe music, just like riaaradar.com